Downgrade Calypso Program from 7.x to 6.x

[[Ca...]]

Hello,

Just wanted to ask if somebody successful already tried to backport a Calypso program to a lower version.
I know if you change the version in the File “Version”, but this is only working from 6.x to 6.x, afterwards with an higher version its no longer working with that trick.

Soooo, is there a solution for this? Or does nobody else has this struggle some times 

Thanks in advance,

Regards,

[[To...]]

Try deleting inspset file

[[Ca...]]

Amazing its working.. If i delete the "inspset" and change the "version" file. Then i was able to use a 7.2 Program on 6.4. 🙂

[[Mi...]]

As long as there is nothing used in the program that didn't exist in the older version this trick should work going back pretty far.

I've opened ver. 7.2 programs in 6.0.28 with this method after deleting a Caliper distance

[[To...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

I typically delete the version file and try it. If it doesn't open, then I go back and delete the inspset file. Deleting the inspset file does delete some settings on the program, exactly what I don't know or remember but it's usually worth the sacrifice to have a working progam.. If you open the inspset file with notepad or wordpad, you'll see the type of data it contains.

[[Me...]]

I've been holding onto this for a long time and testing it on several different versions. To date, I've had no issues and hand not needed to delete any files. (Currently 7.2 with success down to 6.x.) Your choice to use this or not, I'm just sharing.

I have tried converting to 5.x one time but that's a gamble if it works, something about the program structure that may or may not be able to source all the info correctly)

What this script does is run through 5 files where version is mentioned and replaces versions with an older version (Specified version in script). It's not designed to be user friendly because I do not want any typical user to run this. Anyone can break a computer.

Now then,
Warning: MAKE A BACKUP before converting and please before you run this, get with your computer admin and have them confirm its ok to use on your computer. (Don't trust me, trust your computer peep aka admin)
You can safely edit one part of this script on line 28 that says "6.2.20" and replace with a similar format ("#.#.##"). Use your brain, random numbers won't work.


Have your computer peep copy and paste the script into Windows Powershell ISE
Select all the text and click "Run Selection" (little green arrow with paper).
You should have a window pop up to select which folder (and all subfolders) you wish to convert.

Done!
If you have a problem then either your computer peep didn't understand or it wasn't a computer admin who ran it.
If it works for you, I would have your computer peep save it (with "run as admin"), this has been one of the most valuable files I've created.

Script-
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
# Function found from https://stackoverflow.com/questions/256 ... powershell
Function Get-Folder($initialDirectory="")

{
[System.Reflection.Assembly]::LoadWithPartialName("System.windows.forms")|Out-Null

$foldername = New-Object System.Windows.Forms.FolderBrowserDialog
$foldername.Description = "Select a folder with txt files to convert"
$foldername.rootfolder = "MyComputer"
$foldername.SelectedPath = $initialDirectory

if($foldername.ShowDialog() -eq "OK")
{
$folder += $foldername.SelectedPath
}
else{return $false}
return $folder
}

# Launch Function

$a = Get-Folder
# Loop through, recersevly, all txt files within the specified folder

if ($a -ne $false){
$files = @(Get-ChildItem $a\ -recurse -include ("inspection", "inspect", "Protheadpara", "startfile", "version"))
Foreach ($file in $Files) {
(gc $file) -replace '(\d+\.)(\d+\.)(\d+)', "6.2.20" | Out-File -encoding ASCII $file""
}
}

[[Gu...]]

Please note.
There is no function that saves a measurement plan from a new CALYPSO version in an old CALYPSO version.
New CALYPSO versions contain new functions, changes, optimizations within the measurement plan...
All of the functions described in this post harbor the risk of undefined states

[[Ri...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Understood, but Andre Szagesh's method worked quite well on two programs I tested.
In my case, the only issue was programs using Navigator.

[[Je...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

THIS! If there wasn't a reason behind strongly advising against "downgrading" then neither Guenter, myself nor any other ZEISS AE would chime in. You are running very expensive equipment performing precision measurements on critical components but are willing to trust an unverified "hack" to get your program running for the sake of getting a report. Its not a matter of if, but when, you find what didn't work as intended. I will tell you that there are SIGNIFICANT issues with various characteristic calculations when running programs made in 7.* and downgrading to 6.*

[[Me...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Very true! Using unverified scripts, programs, and many other applications can and will cause find a way to break something. It seems there is a hidden issue that seems to remain hidden from me (and maybe other who are looking to unsafely downgrade).

If I may ask though, can you give me some examples of what someone may expect when downgrading with this script? I'm very curious. Specifics would be awesome!

In return, I will remove my script! Fair?

[[Ri...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

I used this script to be able to open a program and see what is or isn't being done. Its for offline purposes.
To me, this is better than creating a virtual machine to run Win7 and an older version of Calypso for the same purpose.

[[Me...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

All the script essentially is, is a "find and replace" with specified files within a subfolder. Anything structured with "#.#.##" or "#.#.####" It replaces with whichever is specified in the script. Nothing fancy at all but super helpful.

[[Gu...]]

As already mentioned by Jeff and I, manipulating CALYPSO measurement plans can create undefined states.
New functions come with the various CALYPSO versions.
Mathematical calculation routines and methods are also optimized in the releases. (Details can be found in the various release notes).
It is unclear which mathematical state results from the manipulation of measurement plans!
Clarify responsibility for the correctness of the measured values if you use manipulated measurement plans!

Also clarify what can arise for you in the event of possible claims for recourse due to the manipulation of measurement plans.

We have developed CALYPSO functions for tracing especially for ISO / AUDIT certification and AUDIT Trails.

Examples are the digital signature and the digital signature of measurement plans:
Extras / Settings / Miscellaneous / Signature
Extras / Settings / Miscellaneous / System / Use versioning
Resources / Result to File / Automatic signing of reports
Extras / Settings / User / Privileges

If you need old measurement plans, use a backup of the old version.
If you manipulate measurement plans, be aware of the possible consequences.
If during an AUDIT certification the auditor asks "...How do you ensure that only tested and approved test plans are used...?", you should have an answer for your rigged measurement plan.

[[Me...]]

Who in their right mind would alter a signed document (or program) after signature? That kind of stuff should be off limits for anyone, anywhere, on any subject.
And to protect a program further, a certification document should include its version at the time of signing, clearing any doubts as Calypso reports versioning in PiWeb (And others).

Now, I did some testing with the current script and can confirm it is unable to access a program in read-only mode which is what certifying a program will do. I will note that a select few Admin accounts have certain permissions (The admin of admins so to say), these accounts may be able to alter a program as read-only but not without first enabling such setting (Default it's turned off), otherwise, all files marked and protected with a digital signature (Pg4 of digital signature PDF for files) cannot by default, be altered by a script or any other means.

Script error note when attempting to alter a read-only file,
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Out-File : Access to the path 'C:\Users\Public\Desktop\REDACTED\inspection' is denied.
At line:28 char:55
+ ... ce '(\d+\.)(\d+\.)(\d+)', "6.2.20" | Out-File -encoding ASCII $file""
+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+ CategoryInfo : OpenError: (:) [Out-File], UnauthorizedAccessException
+ FullyQualifiedErrorId : FileOpenFailure,Microsoft.PowerShell.Commands.OutFileCommand
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

As for the new features, yes. Older Calypso versions cannot register new features correctly and you usually get an unhandled exception when trying to open a program with features from a newer version.

I'm still very interested in how these selected lines alter the mathematical calculations/routes?
#changeswi ' ->' '6.8.24') ((Found in Inspection, Inspect files))
changeswi,7.2.16 ((Found in Protheadpara file))
changeswi 6.8.24 ((Found in Start file))
6.8.24 ((Found in Version file))


In summary, Certified programs cannot be altered. Older Calypso versions cannot open programs with newer unavailable features. Finally, It is the operator's responsibility to verify a program accuracy and repeatability, regardless of version change.

Honestly, I was looking forward to a real reason why we should not do this, something concrete. I am only sharing what works for me and am no way going to push this on other people as too many factors are involved between computers, versions, and users. As stated earlier, "Anyone can break a computer."

Now you did provide a reason, albeit, standard and expected. Thank you, and on your request, I will remove the script.

Calypso Digital Signature.pdf

[[Je...]]

I will not go into detail as the explanation requires entirely too much digging to provide an intelligent, data supported answer but from personal experience, the way that point filters apply, for one example, are not forward compatible. Data analysis methods are not coded to recognize future version programs to apply the proper algorithm specific to proper point selections for a non-considered version of Calypso. MUCH development time goes into maintaining valid analysis of data through future versions of Calypso using legacy programs. To ensure NEW programs work in OLD software is not a typical function of any mainstream software and is not advised. A workaround is exactly that, a workaround, and not endorsed.

To your statement about removing the script, while I can't speak to any PM you may have received, I personally would not make a request that you do so unless it was completely your will. I encourage our users to find new ways to utilize the software and report back their findings for future enhancements and improvements. While we often cannot endorse or officially support many of the methods in their current applied state, they do often pave the way for new ideas. To that note, I do advise against "down-grading" and doing so is completely at your own personal/professional risk.

[[Mi...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

It's easy for the Zeiss employees to talk down hard about why we shouldn't attempt this - you always have access to the latest and greatest software - that's not the reality for your customers. Maybe Zeiss shouldn't make it so prohibitively expensive to stay up to date and these issues would vanish. I would think there should be pretty significant loyalty discounts, especially when a customer has a large amount of machines.

We have 33 Zeiss CMMs w/PCM and a few with Curve. Getting the current version + the apparently non-negotiable SMA fee that we never utilize is about 5k a year per machine. What company is spending 150k a year for minor software updates that don't affect their bottom dollar (from managements point of view)? Our management and many others judging from the conversations here won't even hear the argument because we can't offer tangible cost benefits to upgrading. At the end of the day, we are Automotive, nobody dies if the transmission fails because we got a position result wrong. I'm sure Aerospace, Nuclear and Medical are more inclined to be up to date and perfect.

Zeiss should spend some effort to create nice pretty boardroom-meeting-friendly presentations about the new releases and why people should upgrade. Talk about the ways that upgrading will save their customers money. Release notes don't work on management If those exist please point me to them, because I would love to get our software to Version 7+ for the improvements to Freeform calculations - but that single point for one specific project is nowhere near enough to get the money to upgrade.

We are left with no choice but to force programs to run on different versions. Generally we write programs in the oldest version it might have to run on, 2015 in our case. But mistakes happen and the programs get saved in the higher versions and then we have to edit the version file to "fix" it.

Although thankfully we ALMOST have all of our CMMs on 2018, which is the latest version our oldest copy is entitled to. But that's a 3 year project that was spurred on by the death of Windows 7. I doubt we'll ever get that much money spent in one go again.

[[Je...]]

.

Please sign in to view this quote.

.

Other major software, including competitor metrology software, having employed backwards compatibility (not all, but many of the best have). In modern software development, backwards compatibility is a standard gate in the product design cycle.

Zeiss is an intelligent, agile, successful https://metrologicallyspeaking.com/a-re ... for-zeiss/ company that is willing to invest resources https://metrology.news/zeiss-opens-high ... rtunities/ towards meeting the needs of their customers. Backwards compatibility is a real need that has adequately been communicated.

However, you are absolutely correct, Guenter, in pointing out the real risks in manipulating versions and the potential instability of measured values. Thank you for flagging this.

Perhaps finding a solution for backwards compatibility and testing the solution is an opportunity for development. It's probably not at all easy, but I do think it's (probably) possible.

.

[[Je...]]

What you are actually asking for is "Forward-Compatible". This is an extremely rare practice in software and only done on the simplest of applications (and only a handful in the last 40 years). Backward-compatible is you when can open files from current and previous creation in a current version of software. CALYPSO is backward-compatible as are most software packages. Forward-compatible is using an old version of software to open a newer file type. Try this in two of the most used programs on Earth; Excel and Word. Better yet, load a PS5 disc (read:7.4 written program) in a PS2 (read: CALYPSO 6.4). Would you expect the game to play? The expectation here is unreasonable as it is quite far from software norms.

When new software is released and has a system requirement of a newer Windows operating system, this is accepted as a matter of course. The new software will not run on the out-dated operating system due to file structures or coding routines etc. CALYPSO is the same way. New files will not work on old software. Creating a work-around to do so is risky at best when you are driving extremely expensive hardware that is integral to your business processes.

Michael, you stated that you upgraded all of your CMMs to 2018 due to the "death of Windows 7". The situations are exactly the same.

Please sign in to view this quote.

I am not here to "talk down hard" to anyone, nor are any of the other ZEISS staff that engage with the Forum. We are here only to give instruction and assistance for sound and stable operation of your expensive and critical measurement equipment. When I see someone promoting a process that contradicts that, I will voice my stance.

Please sign in to view this quote.

I would advise that you call your Aftermarket Sales representative to discuss this for an actual resolution.

Please sign in to view this quote.

There are many webinars of this exact nature each year. There are roughly 10 scheduled in the next 12 weeks highlighting various functionalities of CALYPSO. I will make sure you are invited and post the links here and elsewhere soon.

[[Mi...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

They are the same in the sense that software becomes obsolete yes. However that's an OS compared to specific software.

However, Windows 7 was fully supported for 11ish years, and still partially supported with security updates for another 3. And until very recently most *definitely not all* current software could still be installed on legacy versions of Windows like 7, Vista and even XP for the masochists. Even though its incredibly ill advised to be running any of those versions.

Please sign in to view this quote.

We've asked. There are token discounts offered but nothing even close to viable. Zeiss would actually make more money off us than they do now if they let us to a site wide upgrade every year for a few $$ per machine considering until a month ago we still had floppy disc versions installed on some machines.

We would likely still choose to stay 1 full version back to avoid issues, but at least we would be close.

Please sign in to view this quote.

Please sign in to view this quote.

Will these come with downloadable cliff noted presentations with chats and graphs that people who don't understand CMMs will understand and see the value of? Accounting departments don't care about feature updates unless we can prove it saves money in some form or another.

Ending on a high note because I don't hate the Zeiss ecosystem at all. Coming from a company with so many machines. While I'll gripe about the software support, the hardware quality and long term support of the hardware has been fantastic. We have 4 GageMax and around 20 DuraMax machines - half a dozen are old first generation ones. Out on the shop floor in horrible conditions.

We haven't killed one, and their results always correlate well to our Lab Machines. They get serviced bi-annually and there are still no concerns even on our oldest machines.

[[Me...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Won't work for Excel and Word? Nice attempt but let's look at Zeiss's Excel Printout for a perfect example. We can open the Excel characteristics printout (1997-2003 version) with today's current version, edit its header for different information/appearances and then save to the same 1997-2003 version. I'm sure the same could be done with MS Word too.

As far as how Sony, Sony is very different to Zeiss, definitely not in the same category, you're actually changing both software and hardware whereas here with Calypso, it's only software. I know there are some better examples to back your claim but I'm drawing a blank, maybe someone else can point them out? I know a few have to exist...
Also to note, Playstation does push a lot of bug/security updates, but you never see Playstion Ver 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022... A game released today, can be played on a system made a different year/model (Ps5 is still kind of new so a good example would be Ps4 vs Ps4 Pro)

Oh and why do we need a different version every year? Couldn't Zeiss hold onto one version for a few years before releasing the next?

Please sign in to view this quote.

Your first comment here could arguably be considered "hard" (as with a couple others). Seemed like you were almost yelling perhaps? Not sure if that was the emotion you were trying to let out but regardless, message received! 🤣
Now, I'm still with you in not promoting this. I've only placed out a "This works for me but use or not" along with several disclaimers.
I'm also not going to ever promote a $150k bill (or a $2k). If it was possible for everyone and easily obtainable, we'd all suggest to keep things in the same version, right?